War! What Is It Good For?: Conflict and the Progress of Civilization from Primates to Robots Kindle Edition

I thoroughly enjoyed Morris’ previous book ‘Why the West Rules – For Now’, so I had high expectations of this book. Although it didn’t quite reach the benchmark set by ‘Why the West Rules’ (for example, the opening few pages are nowhere near as attention-grabbing), ‘War: What is it Good For?’ is nevertheless worth reading. The formula is essentially the same as in ‘Why the West Rules’: Morris makes a simple argument throughout the book and although he makes regular detours into various aspects of history that are only loosely related to this core argument, he nevertheless returns to it often enough that the book maintains coherence. The core argument of ‘War: What is it Good For?’ is that over the very long term (thousands of years) war has brought about the creation of larger and more organised societies that have been increasingly good at suppressing internal violence, the paradoxical result being that war has progressively decreased the likelihood of people dying violently.

Of the accompanying ‘detours’, the most interesting (to this reviewer) were the thorough debunking of the theory that there is a unique ‘Western way of war’ and Morris’ explanation of why Europeans developed guns much more quickly than the Chinese despite the latter having invented and used them well before they reached Europe. Those who have read ‘Why the West Rules’ will be unsurprised to hear that Morris’ explanation regarding the second of these detours is largely based on comparative geography, with political conditions constituting a secondary if nevertheless important factor. Yet the role of geography in shaping Morris’ overall argument is much less important in this book that it was in ‘Why the West Rules’.

Instead, biology is the key factor underlying Morris’ conclusion in ‘War: What is it Good For?’. Having provided a longue durée history of war in human societies, Morris turns his attention in the book’s latter chapters to the evolutionary reasons underlying why various species evolved to utilise violence. He seamlessly ties this discussion into the emergence of warfare within early human societies, returning to his core argument with the added benefit of an interdisciplinary perspective.

In the final chapter Morris turns his attention to the near future, relatively speaking (although he does not define an exact timeline for many of his speculations, he regularly goes out to between 2020 and 2050 CE). This component of his discussion was the weak point of the book. Having spent six chapters establishing a comprehensive argument about the role of war in human society over a very long period of time, in the final chapter Morris’ emphasises the transformative nature of technological advances. His argument that due to new technologies the next few decades are likely to be very different to the hundreds of centuries that came before them seems overly-optimistic. Even though his overall argument provides some compelling reasons for optimism about the future, this final chapter would have been much more convincing were it based on the same historical and evolutionary arguments mounted in the rest of the book and not on a sudden turn towards technological determinism.

Finally it should be observed that Morris has written this book for a generally educated lay readership. Academic and military readers may find themselves frustrated or unconvinced due to the light style of the prose, the constant detours from the core argument, the use of very simple examples (occasionally these are overly-simplistic, especially where Morris discusses tactics) and the limited supporting data provided in some sections of the book. Yet despite these aspects, the inclusion of endnotes, a guide for further research and a bibliography have allowed Morris to maintain basic academic standards in an unobtrusive way. Readers who want to access this extra information can do so, without it constituting an off-putting element for other, more casual readers. For this reviewer the accessibility of Morris’ approach has been worth the sacrifice of the additional detail that is usually found in academic studies and it is hoped that the accessibility of this book will help to generate wider interest in the field of longue durée military history.

This book makes the argument, at a very high level, that war has brought about changes, on the aggregate, that have outweighed the negative effects of war. These changes have come about primarily as a result of “caging”. This is defined as geographic constraints imposed upon peoples stemming from an increase in population that brings about the replacement of hunter-gatherer activity with agriculture and the creation of states. The creation of these, in the long-term, implies that states need to become better at creating wealth through economic generating activity than through warfare. This, in turn, brings about a state that, eventually, reduces losses stemming from violence and from the ensuing increase in per capita wealth.

Due to the fact that this analysis is done at a very high level, combined with the facts that the argument is not that original and has been elucidated upon in much greater depth in the past by previous authors, the book is really only of value to the novice. This is despite the fact that the book is over 500 pages in length (and the audiobook version 14 CDs in length).

The book’s main weakness is that it does not analyze enough the many factors that accounting for this process. For example, institutionals that war has indirectly lead to in the process of state creation are barely discussed. These include, among other factors, the creation of tax collecting institutions and bureaucracies to administer both that function and many other functions of the state. The institutions that states had to facilitate to increase their income, both directly (i.e., trade development and facilitation, the development of industry and science) and indirectly (the promotion of education and public health, institutions that provide legitimacy and state stability [i.e., English expansion of the voting franchise in the aftermath of the Napoleonic Wars and First World War]). Etc., etc., etc. The book is simply too weak in its examination of these institutional factors.

One would think that a book of this length would have been able to cover these factors. Unfortunately, one reason it does not, is that it goes on too many tangents. For example (and ironically) a too detailed discussion of weapons and military tactics instead of the impact of war on state institutions and the institutions mentioned above.

For these reasons this book is really of value only to the novice. For that audience the book would rank as a three to three-and-a-half-star book albeit even for that audience the book may lack the necessary depth. For the more knowledgeable student of history (especially of the development of state institutions), however, this book would be more in the range of a two to two and a half star.

This book has strongly influenced my world view. Beside its treatment of war and conflict, it is also an excellent history book that cuts through history along the axis of war. Its content is too loaded to be a page turner, but the topic sticks. I found it is logically built up, and although perhaps controversial, it does systematically address all obvious questions. The only part where I found the author wanders off is over-optimistic (at least in my view) description of drones and their capabilities, in Chapter 7. This almost, but not quite, sounds like an advertorial for the US defense industry. It just doesn't fit the otherwise neutral and objective message of the book.

Absolutely brilliant. Some people just won't be able to accept these ideas or even think about them seriously. I don't know what to say to such people besides, "If you really have faith in your own reasoning ability, why not give this some thought?" For those who can tolerate having their assumptions challenged, this book is a must read. Sometimes (often?), reality is more complex than the systems we've been taught to keep our thoughts on the bright side, or aligned with this or that social construct. Yes, these implications ARE challenging to deal with. Even if you ultimately disagree with the author, you can't claim to refute him without seriously pondering the ideas he raises. A very very important book.

This is one of my favorite history books. In 2013 I reviewed Ian Morris’ book titled “Why the West Rules-For Now”. I appreciate his description of “Pax Americana” in Chapter 7. The world needs a “globocop” because there are still bullies in the world (like North Korea). He describes the transition to “Pax Technologica” (in about 30 years). I prefer his description over Neil Postman’s “Technopoly”.